U. Washington and the RIAA: how to frame a laser printer for illegal music downloads
Gotta love these people. The RIAA is sending out subpoenas to people alleging illegal file sharing based on IP address. The problem is, and anyone with a moderately advanced knowledge of computer networking can tell you, that IP addresses can (a) be forged and (b) are not normally constant. There is a fixed number of available IP addresses (you may have heard the stories that we're going to run out of IP addresses in the not distant future, but that's another story) and the address of your computer might change several times a day (via DHCP).
Music industry business model aside, this is a lousy way to sue people.
Here's a quote from the article:
"In two separate studies in August of 2007 and May of this year, the researchers set out to examine who was participating in BitTorrent file-sharing networks and what they were sharing. The researchers introduced software agents into these networks to monitor their traffic. Even though those software agents did not download any files, the researchers say they received over 400 take-down requests accusing them of participating in the downloads.
The researchers concluded that enforcement agencies are looking only at I.P. addresses of participants on these peer-to-peer networks, and not what files are actually downloaded or uploaded-a more resource-intensive process that would nevertheless yield more conclusive information.
In their report, the researchers also demonstrate a way to manipulate I.P. addresses so that another user appears responsible for the file-sharing.
An inanimate object could also get the blame. The researchers rigged the software agents to implicate three laserjet printers, which were then accused in takedown letters by the M.P.A.A. of downloading copies of “Iron Man” and the latest Indiana Jones film.
“Because current enforcement techniques are weak, it is possible that anyone, regardless of sharing content or using BitTorrent, could get a D.M.C.A. takedown notice claiming they were committing copyright infringement,” said Mr. Piatek."
http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/06/05/1723225
I love it! "Uhh, the lab printer was downloading Metallica and we have to revoke its network privileges."
Music industry business model aside, this is a lousy way to sue people.
Here's a quote from the article:
"In two separate studies in August of 2007 and May of this year, the researchers set out to examine who was participating in BitTorrent file-sharing networks and what they were sharing. The researchers introduced software agents into these networks to monitor their traffic. Even though those software agents did not download any files, the researchers say they received over 400 take-down requests accusing them of participating in the downloads.
The researchers concluded that enforcement agencies are looking only at I.P. addresses of participants on these peer-to-peer networks, and not what files are actually downloaded or uploaded-a more resource-intensive process that would nevertheless yield more conclusive information.
In their report, the researchers also demonstrate a way to manipulate I.P. addresses so that another user appears responsible for the file-sharing.
An inanimate object could also get the blame. The researchers rigged the software agents to implicate three laserjet printers, which were then accused in takedown letters by the M.P.A.A. of downloading copies of “Iron Man” and the latest Indiana Jones film.
“Because current enforcement techniques are weak, it is possible that anyone, regardless of sharing content or using BitTorrent, could get a D.M.C.A. takedown notice claiming they were committing copyright infringement,” said Mr. Piatek."
http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/06/05/1723225
I love it! "Uhh, the lab printer was downloading Metallica and we have to revoke its network privileges."